I half wonder if the dumb down is because developers are trying to appeal to a wider audience not because of consoles. Baldurs Gate was hardcore D&D rules if I remember correctly do people still want to play like that other than those of us that miss playing D&D simi regularly?

tfp wrote:I half wonder if the dumb down is because developers are trying to appeal to a wider audience not because of consoles. Baldurs Gate was hardcore D&D rules if I remember correctly do people still want to play like that other than those of us that miss playing D&D simi regularly?

When I played the BG:TOSC for the first time, I had no idea about D&D rules. I was a kid back then. And the game was perfectly playable.

Now, when I know what D&D is, I'm amazed by the depth of game-play mechanics.

Funny, on my first play-through, I remember forming a party of evil+good chars, and Khalid was like a super tank back then. I replayed with the knowledge of D&D rules recently, with max HP per level rolls and stuff. And very high rolls when creating the main character. And on this run, even Minsc seems like total whimp compared to the main character.

The game just have so much re-playability and math behind it, it's just amazing.

DA2 was like an MMO in terms of how it played, but I didn't feel that way about DA1. I was generally pausing between every attack to plan the next one and reposition my party. I didn't play BG, so maybe you're expecting something more than that, but I don't really know how much more complexity you could be asking for.

Now some of that stuff simply wasn't in the BG and other D&D-derived infinity engine games. Some of it probably was, but I guess I feel like it was much more subtle and behind the scenes instead of directly and openly integrated into player's game mechanic.

I can understand this, because there are LOTS of MMO players and very few people like me. But I am I the only one who sees this?

Feedback welcome, particularly from Hawkwing74 and other people who played and loved the original infinity engine games (Baldur's Gate, Planescape: Torment, Icewind Dale).

I'd also appreciate if avid MMO players could chime in and say what they think of my perspective?

The original 2nd Edition D&D rules were not well balanced and were - obviously - before the rise of the MMO. So yes, the nature of the gameplay for the old PC games that adhered to those rules as compared to now has radically changed.

For that matter so has the recent editions of D&D. The new rule sets are MMO like, with the concept of a tank, healer, and DPS.

"Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends. We're so glad you could attend. Come inside! Come inside!"

Ryu Connor wrote:The original 2nd Edition D&D rules were not well balanced and were - obviously - before the rise of the MMO. So yes, the nature of the gameplay for the old PC games that adhered to those rules as compared to now has radically changed.

Well, I'll admit that the new paradigm certainly has tighter game mechanics, but I don't know if that really makes for a better overall RPG.

You're confirming what I thought, which is that MMOs kinda supplanted everything else. I just really don't like that sort of game.

For instance, I hate the concept of explicit aggro-management. Having skills that do nothing but get/reduce aggro makes me feel like exploiting the game mechanics IS a game mechanic.

I tried DA and just couldn't get into it. Wasted money on that one for sure. I found combat to be difficult because monsters were sometimes off screen and yet shooting arrows or spells at you. It didn't seem as manageable as the isometric view in BG.

Sometimes I think I'm just too old or lazy to learn new game mechanics. I don't want it to be like an MMO where you have to pay attention to aggro. If I want an MMO I will play WoW.

I also didn't get into the story as much as Planescape or Baldur's Gate II. Maybe I have read too many derivative fantasy novels or am just burned out on fantasy. If the story drew me in, I may have tried harder to learn the game mechanics.

I keep telling myself when I'm 60 I will still want to play video games but at the moment I don't see it. I haven't seen a single player game that has really impressed me in a long time. I may be too picky...maybe I just had more time pre-job, pre-marriage, pre-baby to devote to video games.

The only single player game I still play is Hearts of Iron 2. I haven't bought a single player game for full price in years (except DA above).

It's apparently Stardock's take on Master's of Magic... I miss the old school RPGs.. I keep trying, but nothing is quite what I'm looking for. Sometimes I feel I've got to build my own game to get what I want..

It would be nice to have a automated DM,loved playing it 25 years ago with the dice figurings etc,we had a very good DMaster very creative.Heck my online name came from my fav personal character Vargis Darkmoor

hawking74 wrote:I tried DA and just couldn't get into it. Wasted money on that one for sure. I found combat to be difficult because monsters were sometimes off screen and yet shooting arrows or spells at you. It didn't seem as manageable as the isometric view in BG.

Sometimes I think I'm just too old or lazy to learn new game mechanics. I don't want it to be like an MMO where you have to pay attention to aggro. If I want an MMO I will play WoW.

Heh. I figured your experience with it would be somewhat similar to mine.

Aggro management and holy trinity (Healer, Tank, DPS) has always been a part of this type of games. You always had some tough guy, with a big shield in front, getting all the aggro, MDPS gets in melee range carefully to not take aggro while ranged DPS (mage, rangers) and healers (clerics) stays "out of harm", keeping their distance with the mobs.

In any game, old or new, you don't want to have your damage dealer get in trouble as all strong damage dealers have less armor and HP than a big, tuff guy with a shield. If you go for 2 1D6+1 katana and charge forth into bunch of mobs, regardless what ruleset applied, you are dead.

So, whats wrong with DA and ME ? I'd say, everything. The game mechanics are dumbed down; you cannot see whats happening in the background. Where are my rolls ? where are my + ? Only some minor fragments of epic RPG elements like positioning are in there. The sad part is how this element effects. In old games when you get in hardest mode, you HAVE to have your strategy, positioning, spells, potions all sorted up BEFORE facing the mobs. If you went for a defensive spell instead of extra fireball, you just pay for that mistake with your parties life. If you went for a 14 str, 14 charisma paladin (paladin required 18 on charisma in old ruleset...dunno about current), you deserve to suffer. In DA&ME RPG ala console gen games, you don't have to worry about it. There is obvious lack of attention on balance and your char is the HERO, period.I don't like this new type of PC games They will just use DA2 base and make BG2 out of it.

Hawkwing74 wrote:I tried DA and just couldn't get into it. Wasted money on that one for sure. I found combat to be difficult because monsters were sometimes off screen and yet shooting arrows or spells at you. It didn't seem as manageable as the isometric view in BG.

I like aggro management and tank/healer/dps as a concept and yet DA still agitated me. The fact you had to macro your party, that they made aggro management frustratingly difficult work through with weak mob control spells (sleep, etc), and to top it all off forced you to deal with large groups of mobs.

It wasn't that finely tuned of a game. I feel DA2 did better.

"Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends. We're so glad you could attend. Come inside! Come inside!"

allreadydead wrote:Aggro management and holy trinity (Healer, Tank, DPS) has always been a part of this type of games.

But they weren't explicitly built around it. That just organically developed from the underlying and somewhat unavoidable fundamentals.

For instance, players implicitly did aggro-management by manipulating the game AI through positioning and tactics. Figuring out the game mechanic and how to handle it was part of the fun.

Now, it's directly built into your skill-set, into everything. It's explicitly there. You don't figure it out on your own, you just hot-key "Get Monster Attention III."

The new games have a made a science out of it. A game chemistry, if you will. All the reactions, ingredients, and equipment is there, right in front of you. The only question is which reaction will create the specific compound the game wants, and I do mean specific. Designers these days generally build the big battles as exactly that kind of puzzle: there is one right way to do it.

---

I don't want the science, I want the mystery of imprecise self-discovery. I don't want chemistry, I want alchemy.

I don't even know what makes BG so special. Maybe it really is all the rolls in the background, the thinking behind how to spend skill points to get the max out of the character class. But it was and still is an amazing game.

DA was very close for me. Reminded me of the BG/BG2/ID/ID2/NWN series, but brought very nice rendering engine, narrated storytelling, etc. Still, the character development was somehow dumbed down, and somehow it felt a little bit automatic.

I actually enjoy the micromanagement behind BG games. With good micromanagement you can beat very tough opponents, with pure strategy alone.

allreadydead wrote:Aggro management and holy trinity (Healer, Tank, DPS) has always been a part of this type of games.

But they weren't explicitly built around it. That just organically developed from the underlying and somewhat unavoidable fundamentals.

For instance, players implicitly did aggro-management by manipulating the game AI through positioning and tactics. Figuring out the game mechanic and how to handle it was part of the fun.

Now, it's directly built into your skill-set, into everything. It's explicitly there. You don't figure it out on your own, you just hot-key "Get Monster Attention III."

The new games have a made a science out of it. A game chemistry, if you will. All the reactions, ingredients, and equipment is there, right in front of you. The only question is which reaction will create the specific compound the game wants, and I do mean specific. Designers these days generally build the big battles as exactly that kind of puzzle: there is one right way to do it.

---

I don't want the science, I want the mystery of imprecise self-discovery. I don't want chemistry, I want alchemy.

I'm not good in english but what I wanted to say, was just what you said

I don't really enjoy overpowered shotgun-shepard in ME, almighty mages in DA. I had an abusively overpowered sorceress in icewind dale 2 but the monsters were tough enough to offer a challange. And with all their ridiculousness, I knew if I beat their +25 rolls with my +20, I can take them down. Now, they removed that put a braindead "nah, yo cant beat them, bro" system. No matter what I do, they are not dying. Like you said, I have to do it, their way; I have to press x, while jumping and singing justin bieber song backwards if it's what they want me to do. They land impossible crits, hit from impossible distances, mitigate my damage way much my nuclear bombs only tickles.. Hell, back in my time with Role Playing Games, those things are considered as bugs.

now, it's a feature

I still play games and I always play hardest mode. However, I get effortless wins against braindead dev logic. Be it RPG, be it FPS, it's just... too damn simple, too dull. Only reflexes, pre calculated dumb movements. No signs of strategy or something I'd call "damn, this is brilliant".. And a final note for Bioware, Voice acting doesn't make it cool when your story and mechanics are no better than a 6 yo can make.

Glorious wrote:The new games have a made a science out of it. A game chemistry, if you will. All the reactions, ingredients, and equipment is there, right in front of you. The only question is which reaction will create the specific compound the game wants, and I do mean specific. Designers these days generally build the big battles as exactly that kind of puzzle: there is one right way to do it.

---

I don't want the science, I want the mystery of imprecise self-discovery. I don't want chemistry, I want alchemy.

They aren't mutually exclusive. The WoW developers - for example - usually manage to use immunities or mob special abilites to force you to have to look at the situation in a different way, creating that imprecise self-discovery. The Devs are clever enough that there is more often than not different ways to approach the situation avoiding the lone right way to do it.

DA:O had the fundamentals, but it lacked the clever implementation. In part because the mechanics were missing some of the richness and tightness necessary to break the mold.

"Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends. We're so glad you could attend. Come inside! Come inside!"

bthylafh wrote:It used the old Second Edition AD&D rules, with the really annoying bookkeeping abstracted away (it's what computers do best).

Go for the eyes, Boo, go for the eyes!

D&D worked great for computer RPG's until they moved on to 3rd edition. There are a ton of classic games prior to changing the ruleset for computers with the pinnacle being BGII. It's been downhill since. Much of the 3rd edition stuff had a bunch of fluff that didn't have any use for a CRPG. I remember wasting a bunch of skill points in talents that were more or less worthless.

Anyways, I hope that this is just a HD remake and not some lame iOS/Android tablet port.